On Sat, 17 Apr 1999, Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner wrote:
> I would vote against that because the hardware available might make a
> difference. For instance, moving an object on a 6502 based system, the C-64
> will probably win both the speed and size catagories, simply because of
> hardware assist. Besides, if this is to match code/speed size between CPUs,
> then not all machines are capable of graphics.
No graphics.
> The Roman Numeral one sounds interesting. To make it fair, I would assume
> that there exists a routine, CHROUT, that takes as input the character in
> the main accumulator and displays it on the output device. The output
> device is a simple TTY like device that supports TAB, CR (which returns the
> print head to the start of the line, and advances to the next line) and BS.
Not necessary. The resulting ASCII string could simply be stored at an
address in memory.
Of course the Roman Numeral problem, while a good one, would give Eric an
unfair advantage since he could just go back and optimize his existing
algorithm, and Eric doesn't need a head start. ;)
> The code for CHROUT is NOT to be counted towards speed or size, but I'd
> probably allow the call to CHROUT to be considered.
>
> Contest open for any CPU anyone would care to write code for.
>
> -spc (Hows that for a contest?)
A hell of a lot more simple than the other proposals being floated.
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar_at_siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.
Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0!
See
http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 04/03/99]
Received on Sat Apr 17 1999 - 16:11:34 BST